Part 4.2 - Contents of the Bharataśāstra

The subject matter in Bharataśāstra presented some points of interest. The first few folios contain explanations on tāla accompanied by a commentary in Telugu. A few folios later subjects like svara, nāda, rāga, śruti etc. appear without any commentary. A few folios later, there is a detailed discussion on rasa with a commentary in saṃskṛta. Still later, there is a repetition of the subject of tāla with a telugu commentary etc. Through the entire manuscript it can be observed that there is a criss-crossing of subjects. This pattern of shifting of subject, the presence/absence of commentaries and so on pointed towards the possibility of there being more than one work in this manuscript. 

On closer observation, colophons of Rāmāmātya and Pratāpa Jagadekamalla were found. On comparison of a portions of this manuscript with that of Tālalakṣaṇam (R7979), it was found that there was a perfect match. Apart from these, there is portion of text, scattered here and there, which bears no colophon or other details of either title or author. Therefore it can be concluded this is a codex in which portions of the works Svaramelakalānidhi, Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi and Tālalakṣana are present. Each of these is discussed below.

1 Svaramelakalānidhi

Svaramelakalānidhi is a medieval lakṣaṇagrantha on music, composed by Rāmāmātya in the year 1550 C.E. The entire text of Svaramelakalānidhi is available in Bharataśāstram approximately from Folio no. 47 to 65. Some folios, especially in the beginning and end do not have numbers on them. But the text, on comparison with the printed edition, is complete.

S.No	Name of chapter / prakaraṇa	Folio numbers—Bharataśāstram
i.	Upodghāta-prakaraṇa	77
ii.	Svara-prakaraṇa	50b to 54a
iii.	Vīṇā-prakaraṇa	54 a to 58b
iv.	Mela-prakaraṇa	NA
v.	Rāga-prakaraṇa	NA

Relevant colophons are also found at the end of the chapters. For instance, 

इति श्रीमदभिनवभरताचार्यवागैयकारतोण्डरमल्ल तंम्मू / म्मात्यनन्दन रामामात्य निर्मिते स्वरमेलकलानिधौ वीणा प्रकरणं तृतीयम् ।

iti śrīmadabhinavabharatācāryavāgaiyakāratoṇḍaramalla taṃmmū / mmātyanandana rāmāmātya nirmite svaramelakalānidhau vīṇā prakaraṇaṃ tṛtīyam |

Note: The reading in the printed edition of Svaramelakalānidhi (1932: p. 20) is—

इति श्रीमदभिनवभरताचार्यवाग्गेयकारतोडरमल्ल-तिम्मामात्यनन्दनरामामात्यनिर्मिते स्वरमेलकलानिधौ वीणा प्रकरणं तृतीयं संपूर्णम् ।

iti śrīmadabhinavabharatācāryavāggeyakāratoḍaramalla-timmāmātyanandanarāmāmātyanirmite svaramelakalānidhau vīṇā prakaraṇaṃ tṛtīyaṃ saṃpūrṇam |

2 Tālalakṣaṇam

Tālalakṣaṇam is a work on the Tāladaśaprāṇas, composed by Acyutarāya between 1530 and 1543 C.E. This work is attributed to Kohala according to an introductory passage after the maṅgalācaraṇa śloka. But internal evidences in the text prove that the actual author of Tālalakṣaṇam is King Acyutarāya, who was the brother of Kṛṣṇadevarāya. This has been discussed in detail in para 4.3. 

The complete textual matter of Tālalakṣaṇa is found in the manuscript of Bharataśāstram, though some folios seem to be missing. The text (both mūla as well as the commentary) matches with that of R7979 and has all the relevant diagrams also. Tālalakṣaṇam is spread over the entire manuscript of Bharataśāstram, albeit in a state of disarray. It ranges approximately between the 65th and 250th folios. Around twenty folios of Tālalakṣaṇam seem to be missing. Further, the page numbers for many folios are not available, which makes it all the more confusing. Sections of Tālalakṣaṇam are interspersed with portions of Svaramelakalānidhi, Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi, and other unknown work(s), here and there.

3 Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi  

This is a lakṣaṇagrantha written by Kavicakravarti Pratāpa Jagadekamalla in the 12th century C.E. Jagadeka was the son of Someśvara—the author of Abhilaṣitārtha cintāmaṇi and ruled over Kalyāṇ between 1138 and 1150 C.E. 

A printed edition of this work by D. K. Velankar Shastri is currently available. This edition was made from a single manuscript. The editor mentions the fact that much material of the work Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi was not available to him at the time of editing the text. He has given as footnotes many quotations of Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi (which were not available in his manuscript) which appear under the name of Jagadeka in Bharatakośa of M. R. Kavi. In addition manuscripts of this work are available at the Oriental Research Institute, Mysore. One of these manuscripts (P-5081, ORI Mys) does share some common material with the printed edition, but on the other hand also deals in a much more extensive manner on the subject of rāgas etc. All these go to show that the work Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi is a very large one, only a small portion of which is available to us today. 

The printed edition of Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi discusses aspects like svara, nāda, prabandha, rāga, vādya, tāla, tāla-prāṇas like mārga, graha, laya, prastāra etc. The editor mentions that chapters like prabandhādhyāya, rāgādhyāya and vādyādhyaya are not complete. He also says that the nṛtyādhyāya is completely unavailable (“Nṛtyādhyāyaḥ sarvathā nāsti”^[1]). Most of the available information is in the tālādhyāya. The editor provides quotations of Jagadekamalla, which are not available in the concerned manuscript used by him, but given by Ramakrishna Kavi in his Bharatakośa, in the form of footnotes.

There is a portion dealing with nṛtya in the manuscript of Bharataśāstram between Fol. No 176-188. The following colophon is seen in Folio No. 188b:

इति श्री महाराजाधिराज श्रीमत्प्रतापचक्रवर्ति जगदेकमल्लविरचिते सङ्गीतचूडामणौ नृत्यधिकरणं समाप्तम् ॥

iti śrī mahārājādhirāja śrīmatpratāpacakravarti jagadekamallaviracite saṅgītacūḍāmaṇau nṛtyadhikaraṇaṃ samāptam || 

Here, Jagadeka calls the chapter Nṛtyadhikaraṇam, whereas in the printed edition, the chapters are called adhyāyas. In this chapter the following subjects are dealt with.

1. Recaka,
2. 108 Karaṇas,
3. Recakai,
4. Aṅgahāra,
5. Añcita,
6. Nṛtyapraśamsā,
7. Sabhapatilakṣaṇa,
8. Sabhya-lakṣaṇa,
9. Sabhā-lakṣaṇa,
10. Gāyaka-lakṣaṇa,
11. Vādya-lakṣaṇa,
12. Nartaka-lakṣaṇa,

As mentioned above, this chapter on dance contains the colophon attributing this to Pratāpa. In addition, there are occasional references to King Pratāpa within the chapter also. 

For instance, in Fol. No. 181a, the following verse occurs—

एवमष्टोत्तरं स्पष्टं करणनां शत क्रमात् ।
समुद्दिष्ट यथा शास्त्रं प्रतापपृथिवीभुजा ॥

evamaṣṭottaraṃ spaṣṭaṃ karaṇanāṃ śata kramāt |
samuddiṣṭa yathā śāstraṃ pratāpapṛthivībhujā || 

These evidences make it amply clear that this section of the manuscript of Bharataśāstram definitely belongs to the work Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi of Pratāpa Jagadekamalla. A noteworthy point at this juncture is that, this Nṛtyādhyāya which was hitherto unavailable to the editor of this work, is available in the manuscript of Bharataśāstram. M. R. Kavi, in the introduction of this work Bharatakośa, does mention that he has access to the dance chapter of Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi. But surprisingly, no quotations from this chapter find place in Bharatakośa. The manuscript (P-5081) from the Oriental Research Institute, Mysore also does not have the chapter on dance. From that perspective, this manuscript—Bharataśāstram assumes much significance.

4 Unknown Work(s)

The rest of the available textual material does not bear any colophon, or details of the name of the author, title of the work etc. Moreover, it is not clear whether this entire material belongs to one work or many.

There is one section of text that extends approximately between the Folio no. 30 and 40, another set between folio no. 247 and 252, and several un-numbered folios (Folio numbers are approximated due to many damaged/missing folios). Some folio numbers are missing/ eaten/ damaged due to which the exact numbers and the order of the original text is difficult to make out. Moreover, of the supposed 350 foilos in the manuscript of Bharataśāstram, only 230 are available now. Therefore the material pertaining to more than 100 folios is missing. This could very well constitute an entire work or even parts of two. 

However, there is one folio which seems to hold some indications as to the nature of the unidentified work. 

Some of the readings are presented below:

(१) विष्णुं लोकगुरुं प्रणम्य शिरसा सन्मार्ग सन्दर्शकम् ।
कीर्ति प्रीतिकरं जनस्य लघुना कालेन कामप्रदम् ।
सेव्यं सद्यतिभिः धृत-प्लुत-न्यासात्तलोकत्रयम् ।
तालानां कथयामि लक्षणमहं पूर्वोक्त शास्त्र क्रमात् ॥ इति कोहल वदनम्

(1) viṣṇuṃ lokaguruṃ praṇamya śirasā sanmārga sandarśakam |
kīrti prītikaraṃ janasya laghunā kālena kāmapradam |
sevyaṃ sadyatibhiḥ dhṛta-pluta-nyāsāttalokatrayam |
tālānāṃ kathayāmi lakṣaṇamahaṃ pūrvokta śāstra kramāt || iti kohala vadanam

(२) सदाशिवः शिरो ब्रह्म भरतः कास्यपो मुनिः ।
मतङ्गो याष्टिको दुर्गाशक्तिः शार्दूलकोहला ।
विशाखिलो दत्तिलश्च कम्बलस्य तलस्त—
—युर्वि—सु रंभार्जुनस्तुम्बुरु नारदौ
आञ्जनेयामातृगुप्तौ रावणो नन्दिकेश्वरः ।
स्वाति र्गलो देवराज क्षत्रराजश्च काहलः ।
रुक्मसेनोध भपालो भोजो भूवल्लभस्तथा ।
एते हि नाट्यशास्त्रप्रवक्तारो युग क्रमात् ॥ इति कोहल वदनम् ॥

(2) sadāśivaḥ śiro brahma bharataḥ kāsyapo muniḥ |
mataṅgo yāṣṭiko durgāśaktiḥ śārdūlakohalā |
viśākhilo dattilaśca kambalasya talasta—
—yurvi—su raṃbhārjunastumburu nāradau
āñjaneyāmātṛguptau rāvaṇo nandikeśvaraḥ |
svāti rgalo devarāja kṣatrarājaśca kāhalaḥ |
rukmasenodha bhapālo bhojo bhūvallabhastathā |
ete hi nāṭyaśāstrapravaktāro yuga kramāt || iti kohala vadanam ||

This list is found almost in the exact same form in the first chapter of Saṅgītaratnākara^[2]. The differences in readings might be attributed to scribal or other manuscript related errors. For instance, the name kāhala in Bharataśāstram reads ‘Rāhala’ in the Saṅgītaratnākara. 

The last two lines and the statement ‘Iti Kohala vadanam are not found in Saṅgītaratnākara. 

(३) तालस्थल प्रतिष्ठायामिति धादोर्घ (ञ/इ) स्मृतः ।
दत्तिलेनाकाल क्रियायोः प्रमाणं त्तालः ।
तलप्रतिष्ठाकरणयोश्चुरीदि ध ञ् त्त(ल) ।
तल्यन्ते प्रतिष्ठाप्यन्ते नृत्तगीतवाद्यान्यनेनेव

(3) tālasthala pratiṣṭhāyāmiti dhādorgha (ña/i) smṛtaḥ |
dattilenākāla kriyāyoḥ pramāṇaṃ ttālaḥ |
talapratiṣṭhākaraṇayoścurīdi dha ñ tta(la) |
talyante pratiṣṭhāpyante nṛttagītavādyānyaneneva 

The fist line of the above is also found in the fifth chapter of Saṅgītaratnākara.^[3]

This folio appears to be the beginning of the work. It is also found in the beginning of the codex. It starts with the nāndī śloka (paragraph i). It is interesting that this very verse is also found in the beginning of the work titled Tālalakṣaṇam which is also a part of this codex. Incidentally this verse also appears in the printed edition of Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi, but the matter that follows it in the printed edition is different. The verses in paragraph (ii) give the names of early authorities on nāṭya ). Since it is found completely in Saṅgītaratnākara, it could be an indication that this part is an interpolation from Śārṅgadeva’s work. That would mean that this was a post-12th century work.

Next, the author moves on to define the term tāla (paragraph iii). Tāla at the very beginning of the work could possibly mean that the work was one that dealt exclusively with tāla and its various facets. The nāndī śloka also reiterates this fact, as it also mentions many aspects of tāla. Of the remaining folios we find another which appears towards the end of the manuscript.

This folio gives us the names of seven chapters that are to be explained in that work, which is an indication that it is a part of the beginning of a work too.

.............त शास्त्रे -र राग विवे(क) प्रकीर्ण प्रबन्ध ताल वाद्य नृत्ताख्याः । सप्ताध्यायाः तत्र ।

.............ta śāstre -ra rāga vive(ka) prakīrṇa prabandha tāla vādya nṛttākhyāḥ | saptādhyāyāḥ tatra |

Moreover, the previous folio discussed, ends with the definition of tāla, and the present folio starts with the same subject. However it is curious to see the list of seven chapters after definitions of a particular aspect of subject (i.e. tāla) has been dealt with. Furthermore, tāla is the fifth of the seven chapters mentioned in the list. If so, why would the work begin with explanations of tāla? 

Some authorities mentioned herein.

1. Viśākhila;
2. Mataṅga;
3. Kohala;
4. Bhaṭṭalolla;
5. Triśaṅkuka;
6. Bhaṭṭanāyaka;
7. Bharata;
8. Tennappanna;
9. Śāṇḍilya;

4.1 Some subjects dealt with in the available material:

i. Etymology of Tāla—This portion deals with the opinions of different authors regarding the etymology of the word tāla. Many of these verses appear in other works such as Tālalakṣaṇam, Bṛhaddeśī etc. There also is a reference to the work Tālakalāvilāsam in this context. Also tāla is defined as “daśaprāṇa-samopetam”. This would help date the present work as one post 16th century C.E., as the concept of Tāladaśaprāṇas and works such as Tālakalāvilāsam also came into vogue only around this period.

ii. 101 Tālas—The explanations of 101 tālas is found in parts. Only those from tāla no. 83 (ratitāla) till tāla no. 101 are found. The remaining folios are missing.

iii. Nāda, Śruti, Svara—The physiological origin of svaras, the distribution of the 22 śrutis amongst the svaras, the names of animals corresponding to each svara and origin of Nāda are mentioned. There are references to Viśākhila and Pāṇini.

iv. Rāga—Rāgaṅga, Kriyāṅga, Upāṅga. Deśī rāgas, Auḍava rāgas 

v. Classification into Janaka-janya

vi. Grama, Sruti intervals of svara-s, Vādi-samvādi, Jāti

vii. Rasa—Rasa sūtra of Bharata, Views of authorities like Bhaṭṭa Lolla, Bhaṭṭa Nāyaka, Triśaṅkuka, List of Vibhāva, Vyabhicārībhāva-s

viii. Vīṇā

ix. Sūḷādi sapta tālas 

x. The verse ‘Samyoge ca viyoge ca’ appears two times in unknown text and once in Tālalakṣaṇam. This is proof that this unknown text contains a minimum of two works.

xi. The following verse is quoted as the opinion of Viśākhila.

विशाखिलमते ॥
शिवशक्त्यात्मतं पुण्यम् यश-म् भुक्तिमुक्तिदम् ।
दशप्राणात्मकं तालम् यो जनाति स तत्ववित् ॥

viśākhilamate ||
śivaśaktyātmataṃ puṇyam yaśa-m bhuktimuktidam |
daśaprāṇātmakaṃ tālam yo janāti sa tatvavit || 

Viśākhila was an ancient authority on nāṭya. This verse is not found in the reconstructed version of the work of Viśākhila^[4]. Further, the daśaprāṇa concept came into practice sometime around the 15-16th centuries. This raises questions on the authenticity of this work.

xii. Commentaries are found scattered in some folios. These are seen both in saṃskṛta as well as telugu. Normally, a commentary on a work will be in a single language only. Since commentaries in saṃskṛta and telugu are found in this codex, it is likely that there is more than one work in question in this case.

4.2 Date of the work(s)  

As discussed earlier, amongst the authorities mentioned after the nāndī śloka (Viṣṇum lokagurum), we find mention of King Bhoja. King Bhoja lived approximately between 1000 and 1050 C.E. This would mean that this work, at the earliest could have come into existence in the 11th century C.E. The paraphrasing of the list of pūrvācāryas from Saṅgītaratnākara would push the date of this work to sometime post-12th century C.E. 

Furthermore, the concept of Tāladaśaprāṇas is mentioned (daśaprāṇa-samopetam) while defining tāla. This concept came into vogue only in the 16th century C.E. Also, there is mention of the work Tālakalāvilāsam of Parameśvara (around 15th century C.E.) which places the time of this work to be post-15th century C.E. Also, while discussing tāla, reference to śūḷādi sapta tālas, which is a concept that came into practice around the 16th century C.E., is found.

An interesting feature that can be seen is that in the chapter on rāga, there is mention of classification into “janaka-janya”. It is a common belief that the janaka-janya system of classification of rāgas came into existence only around the early 20th century C.E. But by the 20th century, works were written in paper and even the process of printing had started. Therefore it is extremely unlikely for this manuscript to have been written in this period (20th century C.E.). Further the condition of the present manuscript also indicates that it is at least 150 years old. 

On weighing the different evidences available in the material, we can surmise that this work(s) was composed in the vicinity of the 16th-17th century C.E.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Saṅgītacūḍāmaṇi: 1958: Intro: p.3

[2]:

Saṅgītaratnakara of Śārṅgadeva: 1943: Vol. I: V. 1.15-1.17: p.12

[3]:

Saṅgītaratnākara of Śārṅgadeva: 1951: Vol. III: p.3

[4]:

Viśākhila’s work on Music—An attempt at reconstruction: 1997